Literature DB >> 15917795

Cognitive psychology: rare items often missed in visual searches.

Jeremy M Wolfe1, Todd S Horowitz, Naomi M Kenner.   

Abstract

Our society relies on accurate performance in visual screening tasks--for example, to detect knives in luggage or tumours in mammograms. These are visual searches for rare targets. We show here that target rarity leads to disturbingly inaccurate performance in target detection: if observers do not find what they are looking for fairly frequently, they often fail to notice it when it does appear.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15917795      PMCID: PMC4224304          DOI: 10.1038/435439a

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  4 in total

1.  The psychophysics of visual search.

Authors:  J Palmer; P Verghese; M Pavel
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  From the laboratory to the clinic: the "prevalence effect".

Authors:  David Gur; Howard E Rockette; Thomas Warfel; Joan M Lacomis; Carl R Fuhrman
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system.

Authors:  David Gur; Jules H Sumkin; Howard E Rockette; Marie Ganott; Christiane Hakim; Lara Hardesty; William R Poller; Ratan Shah; Luisa Wallace
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2004-02-04       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Just say no: how are visual searches terminated when there is no target present?

Authors:  M M Chun; J M Wolfe
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 3.468

  4 in total
  109 in total

1.  Suboptimal decision criteria are predicted by subjectively weighted probabilities and rewards.

Authors:  John F Ackermann; Michael S Landy
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 2.  Systematic review: bias in imaging studies - the effect of manipulating clinical context, recall bias and reporting intensity.

Authors:  Darren Boone; Steve Halligan; Susan Mallett; Stuart A Taylor; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-09-30       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Adaptation and visual search in mammographic images.

Authors:  Elysse Kompaniez-Dunigan; Craig K Abbey; John M Boone; Michael A Webster
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  The effects of local prevalence and explicit expectations on search termination times.

Authors:  Kazuya Ishibashi; Shinichi Kita; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  The prevalence effect in a laboratory environment: Changing the confidence ratings.

Authors:  David Gur; Andriy I Bandos; Carl R Fuhrman; Amy H Klym; Jill L King; Howard E Rockette
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 3.173

6.  Practice makes improvement: how adults with autism out-perform others in a naturalistic visual search task.

Authors:  Cleotilde Gonzalez; Jolie M Martin; Nancy J Minshew; Marlene Behrmann
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2013-10

7.  Assessing the effect of a true-positive recall case in screening mammography: does perceptual priming alter radiologists' performance?

Authors:  S J Lewis; C R Mello-Thoms; P C Brennan; W Lee; A Tan; M F McEntee; M Evanoff; M Pietrzyk; W M Reed
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Failures of perception in the low-prevalence effect: Evidence from active and passive visual search.

Authors:  Michael C Hout; Stephen C Walenchok; Stephen D Goldinger; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-04-27       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 9.  Exploration versus exploitation in space, mind, and society.

Authors:  Thomas T Hills; Peter M Todd; David Lazer; A David Redish; Iain D Couzin
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 20.229

10.  Why do we miss rare targets? Exploring the boundaries of the low prevalence effect.

Authors:  Anina N Rich; Melina A Kunar; Michael J Van Wert; Barbara Hidalgo-Sotelo; Todd S Horowitz; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-11-24       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.